Homosexuality is on the rise in this current day and age. An increasing amount of people of all genders and ages are confessing of experiencing homosexuality and coming out as being homosexual or gay. From famous actors such as Neil Patrick Harris and Ian McKellen to well-known hosts such as Anderson Cooper and Ellen DeGeneres, more and more people are disclosing that they are homosexual and the idea of homosexuality is becoming increasingly open and accepted. With all that being said, what actually is homosexuality? According to Aragon (2004), homosexuality is described as sexual behaviour or attraction to members of the same sex. The term “gay” is referred to male homosexuals while the word “lesbian” is frequently used to describe female homosexuals. Homosexuality exists across all cultures and species; even in the animal kingdom. For example, studies show that despite the presence of sexually active male companions, some Japanese female macaques choose other macaques of the same sex as sexual partners (Vasey & Duckworth, 2006). In fact, female macaques will sometimes compete with males to get close, sexually with other female sexual partners.
However, what is the cause of homosexuality? According to Smith (2017), a study was done by YouGov to identify if Britons believe that people are born homosexual, choose to be homosexual, or are influenced to be gay or lesbian by their upbringings. As a result, a majority of the people think that being gay or lesbian is not a choice, but just what they are born to be. Hence, in the culture and society that we live in, the popular idea on the origin of homosexuality is that it is genetically determined. The reason to this is that it is popularly believed that the sexual orientation of an individual is made up by the genes and is identified through prenatal development. It is not a choice for an individual to decide which gender they are attracted to. This can be explained in a 2017 study done by the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. In the study, it was found that children as young as three and a half years old displayed characters that explained their sexual identity later in their life (Henderson, 2018). For instance, the kids who played toys meant for their opposite gender were more likely to end up being homosexual 12 years later. In short, for a kid at a young age to already exhibit behaviours of the opposite sex, it can be presumed that the sexual orientation of an individual is determined biologically. Therefore, homosexuality is believed to be genetically determined.
The reason why I have chosen this idea for my essay is that I have great interest in understanding further as to why individuals engage themselves in homosexuality. I am considerably open to the idea of homosexuality and would like to know whether the belief that homosexuality is genetically determined is truly accurate.
As mentioned, the favourable belief of the cause of homosexuality is that it is decided in the genes. This assumes that external factors such as the environment and surrounding have no such influence towards the sexual orientation of an individual. An individual is born homosexual and is not able to change the fact. This claim is supported by some scientists and psychologists who have conducted studies on the origin of homosexuality. For instance, in the study of the relationship between homosexuality and cognitive development, Karen Hooker from the National Institute of Mental Health studied both homosexuals and heterosexuals (Shagor, 2003). She matched both groups for age, intelligence, and education level. Three psychological tests which are the Rorschach, the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), and the Make-a-Picture-Story Test (MAPS) were then given to the two groups. The results obtained by Hooker show that there is no significant difference in the answers given by the groups. At last, she concluded that there is no correlation between social factors and sexuality. Nonetheless, the assumption that homosexuality is genetically identified is only logical, reasonable and acceptable to a certain extent. This is so as it assumes that only the genes make up one’s sexual orientation. Any other factors besides genetics are irrelevant in this case. It does not give chance for other influences such as the environment to be a possible cause for homosexuality. Besides Hooker’s study, there are other studies that are against homosexuality as genetically determined and for homosexuality as environmentally influenced. Many researches have been carried out to identify if the claim that homosexuality is nature is accurate. Thus, with all that mentioned, the idea is indeed based on a testable hypothesis as tests can be carried out to determine the accuracy of that statement.
The idea in which homosexuality is genetically determined properly utilises real scientific principles. The principle states that in order for something to happen, there must be an underlying cause to it. The idea matches the principle as homosexuality is assumed to happen because of the difference in genetics of that individual with a heterosexual. Complex investigations such as scientific researches and experiments had also been taken place to determine if homosexuality is truly an effect of nature. A notable experiment was conducted by Swaab and Hofman (1990) where it became the first to report a difference in the anatomical structure of the brain of a homosexual man. In the examination, it was found that a part of the hypothalamus of the brain (the portion of the human brain connected to sexual desire and activity) of homosexual men was structurally different as compared to that of the brain of heterosexual men. A small portion of the hypothalamus, called the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) in the homosexuals’ brains was two times bigger than that of the heterosexuals’. In addition to that, Allen and Gorski (1992) found that the same applies to the anterior commissure (AC) of the hypothalamus in the homosexual subjects in comparison with the heterosexual subjects. The regulation of sexual behaviour does not involve the AC and the SCN. This therefore concludes that it is not likely that differences in sexual behaviour will result in a difference in size of the AC and the SCN. Instead, the size differences came before birth during sexual differentiation. Both Swaab’s and Allen’s findings became the reasoning for the nature argument on homosexuality. Correspondingly, LeVay (1991) conducted an experiment relating again to the hypothalamus of the human brain. However, in his experiment, he examined patients who died from AIDS-related illnesses. LeVay discovered that the third interstitial notch of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH3) was smaller in homosexual men by two to three times as compared to heterosexual men. In this regard, LeVay concluded that the mechanisms that control sexual behaviour called the central neuronal mechanisms, differ between homosexual and heterosexual men. Like Allen and Swaab, LeVay agreed that homosexuality is due to prenatal cerebral development and structural differentiation.
Hence, it can be concluded that there are clear and specific explanations as to why homosexuality is biologically determined. The scientific experiments done by these scientists are proven to be valid as Swaab, Allen as well as LeVay managed to produce the same results in which the size of the portion of hypothalamus differ between homosexual and heterosexual men. These scientists have also confidently concluded that homosexuality is biologically identified. The evidences given are open and transparent, without any ambiguous interpretations.
However, on the other hand, despite the fact that there are many scientists who support the evidence that homosexuality is determined by genetic background, there are still some who believe otherwise. Socio-behaviourists propose that homosexuality is caused by environmental influence, not biological factors. Social theorists often study childhood patterns, peer interactions at an early stage, parental behaviour towards children of different genders, and gender constancy and stability (Heffner, 2003). In return, they see childhood elements as the largest contributing cause to homosexuality. American researchers begin studying the nature of homosexuality during the late 1930’s (Shagor, 2003). The study was conducted by the Kinsey Group at Indiana University in order to meet two goals. The first goal is to determine the number of males engaged in homosexual behaviour and the second is to propose theories of factors that influence homosexuality. The study found that 30 percent of the males that were in college or graduate school programmes had involved themselves in homosexual sexual activity. However, it was found that 16 percent of them have not engaged themselves in such activity since the age of fifteen. Also, 9 percent of them experienced all of their homosexual acts either during adolescence or before reaching the age of 20 years (Grellert, Newcomb & Bentler, 1982). From this study, it is explained that homosexual sexual experiences occur during adolescence and isolated in the latter years. As most social influences happen during the youth period of life, this explains why homosexual activities are mostly carried out in teenage years and dies down in adult years. Hence, homosexuality is influenced by the environment and social factors. Furthermore, David Halperin, a predominant social theorist on homosexuality also have ideas on the environmental effect to an individual being homosexual. Halperin suggests that a dominant mother and a subdominant father will lead to a weak and homosexual son (Thorp, 1992). This is due to the mother having too strong of an image, as compared to the weak character of the father. Also, as a result of the Kinsey studies as well as other studies, one of the theories suggests the same as Halperin in which homosexuality is caused by family structure and its malfunctions. Irving Bieber (1962) carried out a study on a group of male homosexuals. In his study, he found that a large proportion of the male homosexuals had fathers who were isolated and hostile, and mothers who were close and intimate. Further, the mothers have overly-protected their child displaying a much dominant role as compared to their father. The father is then alienated and failed to exhibit a masculine image for the child. This then results in them being feminine and homosexual.
Thus, it is clear that there are scientific evidences to support that homosexuality is genetically determined. At the same time, cultural influence towards homosexuality also has strong backing from social theorists. Many experiments have already been done to test the claim if homosexuality is truly determined biologically. However, these findings do not seem to be able to clarify all cases of homosexuality. Environmental factors may still be a factor of homosexuality. According to Jannini, Blanchard, Camperio-ciani and Bancroft (2010), the debate continues on whether homosexuality is caused by biological or environmental factors. Although these two sides have different abilities to create scientific evidence to support their claim, debate regarding this case still persists. The evidence produced by biological theorists are strong, but do not give absolute reasoning. Contrarily, social theorists provide evidence to support their claim, yet are not always robust. The quality of the existing research is relatively good and have survived the peer-reviewed process. However, more experiments must be carried out to test the accuracy of the claim. Hence, the certainty of the idea of homosexuality being genetically determined is presently inconclusive.
Initially, when I first heard of the cause of homosexuality being genetically determined, I was quite supportive of it. This is because it made sense to me how homosexuality may be biologically determined. The reason to this is that I had personal experience of stories told by a friend of mine. My friend who is homosexual explained how he has always known since a very young age that he “liked” boys and not girls. In the past, he had given himself a chance by engaging himself in a relationship with the opposite sex. However, in the relationship, he realised that he did not feel any sort of attraction and knew for sure that he was not straight. He then accepted who he is and live his life as a homosexual man. In this case, it can be assumed that his homosexuality is biologically fixed. Due to that, I believed his story and came to a conclusion myself that homosexuality is nature. However, after investigating more about this topic and understanding the scientific principles of it, I have realised that both sides of homosexuality being nature or nurture have their own reasoning and supporting evidence. In this case, I have concluded that the hypothesis, “homosexuality is genetically determined” is not accepted. This is because many scientific investigations had been carried out by various researchers and scientists, and clear and strong evidence were given to support both sides, be it nature or nurture. No one theory or experiment results to a definite answer. Halperin’s study may give creditable explanations to support that homosexuality is an effect of the environmental factor. However, LeVay’s study also shows us that anatomy is the reason to the difference in sexual orientation. Therefore, there is no correct answer that sexual orientation is a cause of interaction between the environmental or anatomical factors, shaping the individuals’ gender orientation at an early stage. After evaluating the evidence, I have also concluded that this idea is more pseudoscience than it is science. This is due to the fact that there is no reliable evidence that supports that homosexuality is only either nature or nurture. Although there is strong reasoning that homosexuality is nature as well as it being nurture, however, there is no definitive answer if it is either one of them. Also, the evidence given lack theoretical agreement that it is nature and not nurture, and vice versa.
After carrying out this assignment, I have also learnt that my interpretation towards ideas may not be scientifically accurate. As mentioned, before researching and understanding the cause of homosexuality further, I believed in the claim that it is completely the result of nature after knowing of a personal experience from a friend. However, the hypothesis was not accepted as there is actually no definite answer to it. Homosexuality may be nature, or it may also be nurture. Therefore, I now understand that it is important to carry out scientific method in order to identify the correctness of a hypothesis and the accuracy of an initial interpretation. Scientific method can also be applied in my own personal life in order to solve problems in relationships, school, work and so on, as well as in my professional work life. For example, in order to apply scientific method in my life, I can follow these steps: make an observation, form a hypothesis, design an experiment or evaluate reasoning to test the hypothesis, analyse data to determine whether to accept or reject the hypothesis, and form a new hypothesis if necessary. I can carry out these steps when I am in charge of making a decision on a big project at work, or even identifying if my television at home is broken. Besides that, I have also learnt that I am quite easily influenced by the opinion of others. For instance, I was immediately convinced that homosexuality is entirely nature after hearing the story from my friend. I did not go through much research or reading before making a confident stand on the topic. At last, the claim was inaccurate. Therefore, I have learnt that issues and topics require thorough scientific thinking to identify the most accurate guess. I have also realised the importance of being “scientific literate” as it provides an individual with scientific ideas and knowledge regarding issues that happen around the culture, society and the world today.